arXiv:2506.08216cs.LGcs.CC2025-06ICML被引 14

从计算复杂度角度解析集成模型为何难解释

What makes an Ensemble (Un) Interpretable?

  • 用计算复杂度理论分析集成模型的可解释性难题
  • 即使基模型固定大小,解释集成仍难以高效求解
  • 小规模决策树集成可解释,线性模型集成则不可

集成模型在机器学习领域被广泛认为可解释性差。例如,单个决策树是可解释的,但集成树(如提升树)常被视为黑箱。尽管这一认知普遍存在,但对集成模型可解释性的数学机理尚缺乏严谨理解,尤其不清楚基模型的数量、大小和类型如何影响其可解释性。本文通过引入计算复杂度理论,研究不同集成配置生成解释的挑战。分析发现,在标准假设(如P≠NP)下,即使基模型为常数大小,解释集成仍属难解问题。令人意外的是,基模型数量对复杂度影响显著:少量决策树集成可高效解释,而仅含常数个线性模型的集成依然难解释。研究结果为理解集成模型可解释性提供了更坚实的理论基础,强调了从计算复杂度视角审视其价值。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Ensemble models are widely recognized in the ML community for their limited interpretability. For instance, while a single decision tree is considered interpretable, ensembles of trees (e.g., boosted trees) are often treated as black-boxes. Despite this folklore recognition, there remains a lack of rigorous mathematical understanding of what particularly makes an ensemble (un)-interpretable, including how fundamental factors like the (1) *number*, (2) *size*, and (3) *type* of base models influence its interpretability. In this work, we seek to bridge this gap by applying concepts from computational complexity theory to study the challenges of generating explanations for various ensemble configurations. Our analysis uncovers nuanced complexity patterns influenced by various factors. For example, we demonstrate that under standard complexity assumptions like P$\neq$NP, interpreting ensembles remains intractable even when base models are of constant size. Surprisingly, the complexity changes drastically with the number of base models: small ensembles of decision trees are efficiently interpretable, whereas interpreting ensembles with even a constant number of linear models remains intractable. We believe that our findings provide a more robust foundation for understanding the interpretability of ensembles, emphasizing the benefits of examining it through a computational complexity lens.

可解释性集成学习计算复杂度

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。